Conveyancing - not getting ripped off

scarletjim

Do these conveyancing costs look reasonable? I'm purchasing a property for 345k and the estate agent wants me to use their solicitor, I'm ok with this as long as they're not ripping me off. Is anything in this list wildly overpriced or indeed unnecessary at all?

Stamp duty £10,350
land reg fees £280
Fees for pre-contract searches £358.80
Fees for pre-completion searches £12
Conveyancing (ex VAT) £599
VAT £134.80
SDLT1 form £75

Total £11,809.60
Plus smallprint also says an additional £39+VAT for each telegraphic transfer and £29+VAT for permanent document storage.

Excluding the stamp duty, I thought when I looked at all this a few months ago, it should only cost about a grand, this is nearer £1,600...

Richard_Webster

There 's the usual extra fee for completing the SDLT form but even taking that into account the charges (£599+£75=£674+VAT) for the work aren't unreasonable. TT Fee is slightly higher than normal but not OTT. Document Storage is more questionable.

The Searches seem a little on the high side but this could be an expensive Council and/or extra searches might be needed (e.g. mining).

I don't work it out at £1,600 excluding the SDLT, more like £1,500. If the searches and the LR fee are fixed then they would have to do the legal work for around £300 + VAT to get the total (apart from SDLT) down to £1,000.

timmyt

scarletjim wrote: »

Do these conveyancing costs look reasonable? I'm purchasing a property for 345k and the estate agent wants me not want never want, always walk away if an Agent 'wants' you to....to use their solicitor they wont be a solicitor so you are not getting best vlaue for that fee, as I'd charge the same but you'd get an actiual solciitor just like Richard above, even, I'm ok with this as long as they're not ripping me off. Is anything in this list wildly overpriced or indeed unnecessary at all?

Stamp duty £10,350
land reg fees £280
Fees for pre-contract searches £358.80
Fees for pre-completion searches £12
Conveyancing (ex VAT) £599
VAT £134.80
SDLT1 form £75

Total £11,809.60
Plus smallprint also says an additional £39+VAT for each telegraphic transfer and £29+VAT for permanent document storage.

Excluding the stamp duty, I thought when I looked at all this a few months ago, it should only cost about a grand, this is nearer £1,600...

good luck OP

G_M

scarletjim wrote: »

Do these conveyancing costs look reasonable? I'm purchasing a property for 345k and the estate agent wants me to use their solicitor, I'm ok with this as long as they're not ripping me off. Is anything in this list wildly overpriced or indeed unnecessary at all? always better to choose your own conveyancer.

Stamp duty £10,350
land reg fees £280
Fees for pre-contract searches £358.80 depends which council. That's an expensive one
Fees for pre-completion searches £12
Conveyancing (ex VAT) £599 seems fair
VAT £134.80
SDLT1 form £75 really should be inclusive in the 599 not an extra - it's part of the job. Is the 75 incl VAT?

Total £11,809.60
Plus smallprint also says an additional £39+VAT banks charge £25-35 incl for each telegraphic transfer and £29+VAT for permanent document storage.should be inclusive in the 599

Excluding the stamp duty, I thought when I looked at all this a few months ago, it should only cost about a grand, this is nearer £1,600...

Look here for info on how to compare quotes.
If looking at online or cheaper companies, ask if you'll be dealt with by a Solicitor, Licenced Conveyancer, or an admin person overseen by solicitor etc.

scarletjim

Many thanks for the useful advice. Having trawled through months of threads about the issue of local / traditional solicitor v on-line, there seems to be good and bad arguments both ways...

I have been looking at Adobe Conveyancing for 4 reasons:

1. It's cheap!
2. It lists exactly what is and isn't included.
3. It asks for the postcode, so less estimation in the searches fees.
4. I'm assuming that because I'm buying a new house from a well known builder via a well known estate agent, and there is no chain involved for them or me, this will be straightforward and difficult to screw up. Is that a foolish assumption?

Would welcome any more views before I take the plunge...

G_M

Number 4 seems a very optimistic AND foolish assumption!!!!!

scarletjim

G_M wrote: »

Number 4 seems a very optimistic AND foolish assumption!!!!!

So those factors don't make it an easier transaction? Why not? :undecided

G_M

because I'm buying a new house from a well known builder via a well known estate agent, and there is no chain involved for them or me, this will be straightforward and difficult to screw up.

New builds come with all sorts of snag-lists, initial defects. 'Well known' builders make as many c*ck-ups (maybe more as they tend to be big mass-prodction outfits?) as smaller less well known ones. And 20, 30 + year old houses have most issues resolved. New builds are often in Developments, with many restrictive covenants written into the contract - these need checking. New builds may be on a part-finished Development - who owns the roads/utilities etc? the builder? or has the local authority adopted them? Needs checking. New build timescales are often ambiguous if the property is still in construction. Estimated completion dates frequently move if the weather changes or the build is delayd for any one of 100 reasons. Need I go on?

Estate agents, whether 'well-known' national chain or not, are simply concerned to see the deal go through and get their commission. And they work for he seller, not the buyer. They cannot resolve legal issues, or structural queries, etc and will be likely to undertate these rather than resolve them. Being 'well known' does not = ethical, efficient, professional etc

Chain free - yes, that makes things simpler.

scarletjim

Hmmm, some of those don't apply, but others do concern me.

Property and development are both finished, mine was one of the last few to be done, so no issues there.

However, 'restrictive covenents' do concern me, not so much about what I can do to the exterior of the house, but more because it seems they can be applied to who can live there, as I might (will probably) rent a couple of rooms to some mates. Is this a common thing? It would probably make me not purchase!

I would also be concerned about 'snag lists' if you mean that they could find ways to not honour their responsibilities etc.

So yes I appreciate that buying new from developer does not necessarily mean no problems - but does that mean an online conveyancer would be unable or less likely to spot or resolve such potential issues (especially with me nudging them)?

G_M

I'm not saying don't do it, I'm saying don't assume it's easier because of the 'well known' names involved.

Personally I think the most complex purchases are unregistered land (increasingly rare), rural properties with covenants/rights of way etc, flats with complex leases...... and new builds on new developments.

As for choice of conveyancer there are (I think) two Qs to ask yourself (or them):
1) can I get access easily? ie local firm I can drop in and demand to see someone; online can I ring and speak not to a call centre, but to someone who has sole responsibility for my conveyance?
2) who will actually be doing the work? A solicitor? A Licenced Conveyancer? Or an admin assistant 'overseen' by a solicitor who is 'overseeing' 20 other admin people each of whom is managing 20/30 properties.........

One thing is sure - if the fee is minimal there is a reason they can quote so low: either they'll add on lots of 'extras' that should hav been quoted upfront, or the work is being done by low-paid, semi-qualified people 'overseen' by an overworked professional.

scarletjim

Yes well of course I was hoping that my type of purchase might be easier than others, thereby perhaps warranting the cheaper online solution, but clearly that's not necessarily the case.

With covenants, do you know how common the restriction is on who lives in the property? Perhaps I should seek this info from the builder before I even bother appointing a solicitor...

EDIT: But isn't there also a legitimate reason for lower fees, that they don't need to have a physical office in a sometimes expensive location (I live right in the middle of town)? Not saying your reasons are invalid, of course they're not, but surely there are also legitimate reasons for online being genuinely cheaper?